Voting in US elections is becoming a joke

[Cornish Steve]

I just read that, in one US city, three busloads of voting-age students were taken to the polling station so they can vote. Once there, they were given sample ballots containing only the names of one party's candidates. And once they're finished voting, they were taken out for ice cream.

Other reports are coming in about abuse of electronic voting machines. In one city, early voters brought up supposedly pages on which to vote, and all the candidates from one party were preselected.

In a recent test, university students broke into the software in election machines in just 90 minutes - and programmed them to play Supermario. This type of machine is being used in 33 of the 50 states.

Some state governments deliberately delayed sending ballots to army members serving overseas so their votes would arrive late. This is totally illegal, so at least one state is being sued.

I'm sure that both parties are playing equally dirty, so it means that US elections are becoming a joke. Billions of dollars are being spent and wasted (one union alone has contributed $88 million to one party), some companies and unions are sending workers en masse to drive voters for their party to the voting booths in critical states, and the entire system is a mess.

Despite all the shenanigans, it looks like tomorrow will be a landslide against the president and his party. In the polls, they are down by the largest percentage on record. He's proved himself to be totally incompetent, and the only laws he's signed are desperately unpopular and will be overturned. Whether the election makes any difference, though, remains to be seen. Only one third of senators are being voted on tomorrow (they serve for six years, and one-third face elections each 2-year cycle), and it would be quite amazing if enough lost their seats to lose their sizable majority.

By the way, you should hear the negative ads going around here in Georgia - and these are mild compared with some others. It's all name-calling, questionable accusations, slander, and more. I've also had automatic calls arriving today at my office phone - and I can't even vote. It drives you crazy.

What a complete shambles.

 

[vvaannmmaann]

Should I care?
Not sure why the British media (Sky in particular ) is so obsessed with it all.

 

[stugster]

In a recent test, university students broke into the software in election machines in just 90 minutes - and programmed them to play Supermario. This type of machine is being used in 33 of the 50 states.

Just a note: this is a problem with the physical layer, not the software/technology itself.

 

[directmarketingadvice]

(one union alone has contributed $88 million to one party)

Actually, it's 2 unions combined and it's not one party:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...+wsj/xml/rss/3_7011+(WSJ.com:+What's+News+US)

But let's not let the facts get in the way of your constant anti-Democrat rhetoric.

As for the US Elections "becoming" a joke, didn't that start when George Bush' brother prevented thousands of black people voting in Floriday in 2000?

Steve

 

[Cornish Steve]

Actually, it's 2 unions combined and it's not one party:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704125604575449913707878130.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wsj/xml/rss/3_7011+%28WSJ.com:+What%27s+News+US%29

But let's not let the facts get in the way of your constant anti-Democrat rhetoric.

As for the US Elections "becoming" a joke, didn't that start when George Bush' brother prevented thousands of black people voting in Floriday in 2000?

Steve

Those are old numbers (August). I read an article a couple of days ago (trying to track it down) that shows spending by one union (government and municipal employees union, I believe) is at $88 million. Two other unions combined (one of them the SEIU) donated about the same amount. In other words, three unions alone donated over $150 million to their particular party.

As for black voters not being allowed to vote, can you substantiate? The only thing I can remember is some states requiring photo ID to avoid voter fraud, and this affected minority voters more than others. Of course, there are pending inquiries against the Black Panthers for standing outside voting booths with baseball bats and intimidating everyone who planned to vote. Then there are the thousands of dead people who voted in close elections! One group registered non-existent voters using the names of their favourite football teams, which caught that particular fraud. There are unsavoury practices going on all over the place - which, again, makes voting something of a fiasco. When the margin of victory is clear, they don't affect the result. In close races, though, they definitely have an impact.

 

[Cornish Steve]

OK - here's the link. It's from the Boston Globe, a Democrat-supporting paper.

"The biggest outside spender is the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, which is pumping almost $88 million into TV commercials, phone banks, and mailings to promote Democratic candidates."

"AFSCME isn't the only public-sector union "spending big'' to influence the vote on Nov. 2. So is the National Education Association and the Service Employees International Union, respectively the nation's largest and fastest-growing unions. Together, the three government-employee unions will have spent nearly $172 million campaigning for Democrats in the course of this election cycle."

Of course, this is not to say that other organizations don't support other parties: They do. The Chamber of Commerce, for example, donates large amounts to the Republicans. Maybe these things come out in the wash. The extent to which voting is compromised, though, is unknown - and it could be a lot. Huge donors, questionable technology, voter intimidation, and the like raise a big question.

One of the nice things about the British system is that there's a clear limit on the amount any candidate can spend, and there's less room for votes to be fixed or compromised.

 

[quikshop]

As for black voters not being allowed to vote, can you substantiate? The only thing I can remember is some states requiring photo ID to avoid voter fraud, and this affected minority voters more than others.

Not taking sides in this debate, just thought I'd chip in... when Bush won his first term beating 'the Green crusader' in the election decided by the supreme court the were several documentaries that highlighted rigged voting throughout the states that disadvantaged minorities, but particularly in Florida were they had the Florida Central Voting File scandal.

The poor and uneducated are always dis-enfranchised by democratic voting systems, but the Florida issue took it to a whole new level of purposeful exclusion.

 

[directmarketingadvice]

As for black voters not being allowed to vote, can you substantiate?

Quickshop got in there before me.

The important part is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File#Demographics_of_the_purge_list

although blacks accounted for 88% of those removed from the rolls, they made up only about 11% of Florida's voters

i.e. a black voter was 59 times more likely to be removed than a non-black voter.

Steve

 

big business and unions getting involved in political funding donations can only ever be bad for democracy .
quite how democratic the usa is ?

 

[Cornish Steve]

big business and unions getting involved in political funding donations can only ever be bad for democracy .
quite how democratic the usa is ?

This is why I like the British system: The limits on spending are low and strictly enforced (at least, they were when I lived there). It means that candidates must make the case based on policies, not on personalities - and they are forced to get out and meet the people.

 

[The Pines]

This is why I like the British system: The limits on spending are low and strictly enforced (at least, they were when I lived there). It means that candidates must make the case based on policies, not on personalities - and they are forced to get out and meet the people.

Low? Yes.
Strictly enforced? Hmmmm... Zak Goldsmith
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/15/zac-goldsmith-election-expenses

EDITED TO ADD:
Please don't think I'm a Grauniad reader - it was just one of the first Google hits. Other variations of this story in the Times, Independent, etc

 

its not perfect Steve but I feel its better America loves a bit of drama and showbiz ,so im not sure it will change any time soon.
if anyone had dared to ask for spending to be caped of political funding fox news would explode

 

[directmarketingadvice]

It means that candidates must make the case based on policies, not on personalities

Is that why Gordon Brown spent an afternoon talking to that pensioner (Gillian Duffy)? To talk about policies with her behind closed doors?

Or was he there to try to repair some of the damage caused by people seeing his real personality?

Steve

 

[Cornish Steve]

I just spoke with my second son, who is a dual citizen and hence able to vote here. The ballot paper was 11 pages long.

• The one of two US senators facing reelection
• The governor (the likely crook or the proven incompetent that I mentioned before)
• The state school superintendent and the attorney general
• Various candidates for the state senate and house
• The commissioner for labour and the commissioner for insurance
• The various judges and appeals court judges
• Several propositions (referenda). For example, one is to force the state government to ensure there's a hospital with a trauma center within 30 minutes' drive of anywhere in the state (something like that, anyway). In past elections, there have been propositions for additional parks, for example. Some states this time around are using this process to legalize the use of marijuana. Gay marriage often comes up as a proposition.

Many of the positions have only one candidate standing. I wondered why bother voting for them, but apparently locals can give the name of a 'write in' candidate and vote for them instead. For example, if a community believes that someone else would be better in the post, they can nominate and vote for them on the ballot. Occasionally, a write-in candidate does win, which must be terribly embarrassing for the candidate on the ballot.

In this respect, voting in the US is very different. You vote in the judges, the sheriff, the school board, and plenty of other government positions.

 

[quikshop]

In this respect, voting in the US is very different. You vote in the judges, the sheriff, the school board, and plenty of other government positions.

I know it can be a royal pain in the rear but I quite like the idea of voting for civic positions like top local police bod, school boards, lollipop ladies etc... it makes (or should) for a more empowered and energised society.

Anyhoow, the Daily Mash hits the nail on the head again.

I am as non-socialist as is possible without being on Labours 'to be dealt with' list, but this Tea Party movement and some of the horrendously stupid and breath-takingly false stuff their members come out with make our politicians expenses forms seem like a good read

 

[dingbat]

Why worry about voting procedure when so much of America's thought is Pavlovian. Leave your brain at the door politics.